I came across this page on BaseballAmerica that shows their top 100 prospects lists from each year going back to 1990. It's pretty funny to go back and look at where people from the Sox were ranked and see who was similarly thought of at that time.

2000:
63. Aaron Myette, rhp, White Sox
64. Adam Eaton, rhp, Padres
65. Ben Sheets, rhp, Brewers
If Myette could have been Adam Eaton, that would have been nice. If he had been Ben Sheets, whoa.

1998:
56. Magglio Ordonez, of, White Sox
57. Julio Ramirez, of, Marlins
Maybe this list was why Jerry Manuel insisted on playing him over and over at the start of 2001--he was supposed to be as good as Ordonez.

"Genius is not replicable. Inspiration, though, is contagious, and multiform — and even just to see, close up, power and aggression made vulnerable to beauty is to feel inspired and (in a fleeting, mortal way) reconciled."
--David Foster Wallace, () "Roger Federer as Religious Experience"

__________________It breaks your heart. It is designed to break your heart. The game begins in the spring, when everything else begins again, and it blossoms in the summer, filling the afternoons and evenings, and then as soon as the chill rains come, it stops and leaves you to face the fall alone. - A. Bartlett Giamatti

This goes to show that there is absolutely no thing as a baseball "expert."

I echo the sentiment that this statement is a bit out of bounds. If there were no baseball experts then there would be no use for scouting. You could just throw darts at player's names and do the draft that way.

Just because players are missed in top 100's is no reason to dismiss "experts".

__________________

March 16, 2005 - Another happy Sox fan joins the party!
July 6, 2012 - 7 years later he's still part of it...

Its also a ranking of "Prospects". You realize the term prospects derives from the word Prospective. Some guys, like Pujols, just did not fully put it together until they got to the Bigs. It is very cool to look back on, but some average fan that put together a blind top 100 would not do any better but almost surely far worse.

I echo the sentiment that this statement is a bit out of bounds. If there were no baseball experts then there would be no use for scouting. You could just throw darts at player's names and do the draft that way.

Just because players are missed in top 100's is no reason to dismiss "experts".

I'm not saying scouting isn't important I'm saying that there is no way to predict who is gonna to evolve and who is going to bust. There just isn't. That's why trades for prospects will always be a huge risk...some of them end up like Aaron Poreda and some of them end up like Gio Gonzales.

I'm not saying scouting isn't important I'm saying that there is no way to predict who is gonna to evolve and who is going to bust. There just isn't. That's why trades for prospects will always be a huge risk...some of them end up like Aaron Poreda and some of them end up like Gio Gonzales.

And I think that idea is wrong. That's exactly what scouting is. That's why some players are 1st round draft picks and others are 50th round draft picks. That most of those players fail in baseball is just pure statistics: hundreds of players are drafted every year, there are thousands of players in the minor leagues, but only a small handful of those will make the major leagues. That the best are wrong most of the time doesn't mean they are failing overall and there are no experts in the field, just as you wouldn't call every major league baseball player a failure because they fail in the majority of their at bats.

And I think that idea is wrong. That's exactly what scouting is. That's why some players are 1st round draft picks and others are 50th round draft picks. That most of those players fail in baseball is just pure statistics: hundreds of players are drafted every year, there are thousands of players in the minor leagues, but only a small handful of those will make the major leagues. That the best are wrong most of the time doesn't mean they are failing overall and there are no experts in the field, just as you wouldn't call every major league baseball player a failure because they fail in the majority of their at bats.

No problem with what you say here. My contention is that if you studied football and basketball drafts over the years there would be a greater percentage of high draft picks making it in those sports than in baseball. Now, at this point I have neither the time nor the inclination to prove or disprove this. Perhaps someone has done it already, there are more "studies" about more subjects out there these days than ever it seems.

. Some guys, like Pujols, just did not fully put it together until they got to the Bigs.

Nah, Pujols wasn't ranked higher probably because he was in the low minors in his first professional season. He started in low A Midwest League in 2000, and was in the majors the next year. Meanwhile, Crede was coming off an impressive season at Birmingham.